Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the Tribunal is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay in filing. The assessee's grounds of appeal include that the CIT(A)'s order was unjust, unwarranted, and that the merits of the case were not considered.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Although the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of justice.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal dismissed in limine by the CIT(A) for delay ought to be restored for adjudication on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
250, 143(1), 11, 10B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the ADDL/JCIT (A)-3 Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) I.T.A. No.: 496/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Preservation and Proliferation of Rural Resources and Nature. for AY 2018-19 dated 20.06.2024, which has been passed against the intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 16.12.2019. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the order passed by Id JCIT(A) is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law.
That the Id JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the merits of the case.
That the Id JCIT erred in disregarding the fact that audit report in Form 10B was filed in accordance with the provisions of law.
That the Id JCIT erred in not allowing benefit of Section 11 of the act while computing total income for the relevant year.
That the Id JCIT erred in confirming the total income for the relevant year, as computed in the intimation dated 16.12.2019. 6. For any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing”
It is noticed that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine. However, after considering the submissions of both the sides, we condone the delay, if any, before the Ld. CIT(A). At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order. Hence, the Ld. AR prayed before the Bench to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to his file for adjudication afresh. The Ld. DR did not oppose the request of the Ld. AR.
The assessee, despite being provided sufficient opportunities of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A), did not present himself in the appellate proceedings and therefore, cannot agitate for violation of the principles of natural justice; however, we are of the view, that in the interest of I.T.A. No.: 496/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Preservation and Proliferation of Rural Resources and Nature. justice, the assessee should be granted one more opportunity. This being so, the issue in this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th April, 2025. [Rakesh Mishra] [George Mathan] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 07.04.2025 Bidhan (P.S.) I.T.A. No.: 496/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Preservation and Proliferation of Rural Resources and Nature. Copy of the order forwarded to:
Preservation and Proliferation of Rural Resources and Nature, Shastri Nagar (East), Road No 6 Sikariya More, Gaya, Bihar, 823001. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Income-tax, CPC, Bangalore.
ADDL/JCIT (A)-3 Delhi.
CIT-
CIT(DR), Patna Bench, Patna.
Guard File. //// By order